Products Liability Flashcards
Implied Warranty
By putting a product into the stream of commerce, a seller implies that the product is safe for the purposes of its use.
Express Warranty
Explicit promise or representation of a product made by its seller/manufacturer.
Products Liability: Warranty
A manufacturer is strictly liable for damages which result from the failure of products to comply with representations made by the manufacturer.
Baxter v. Ford Motor
Shatter-Proof Windshield
A manufacturer is liable for breach of express warranty even if the product was purchased from a third party seller
Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors
Wheel Spin
A manufacturer who advertizes their product takes on an implied warranty taht the product is reasonably safe for its advertized use.
Manufacturing Defect
Inevitable failings in the manufacturing process result in anomalous defects in some products
Elements:
1. The product reached the user in an unreasonably dangerous condition
2. There were no substantial changes in condition from leaving the manufacturer to reaching the user
3. The defective condition was the cause of the injury
Design Defect
Intentional design decisions made by the manufacturer have resulted in an unsafe product
Elements:
1. The product reached the user in an unreasonably dangerous condition
2. The injury was caused by the defect
3. The defect can be traced back to the manufacturer.
Rix v. General Motors
Damaged Hose in Car
In manufacturing defect cases, the plaintiff must prove the defective product reached the user in the same condition as when it left the manufacturer. This is not required in design defect cases.
Prentis v. Yale Manufacturing
Forklift
The plaintiff is held to a negligence standard in design defect cases.
Friedman v. General Motors
Circumstantial evidence can prove a defect so long as it shows the injury was caused by a defect rather than other possible causes. The plaintiff does need to eliminate all possible causes.
Daly v. General Motors
Defective Car and a DUI
Comparative negligence may be mixed with strict liability. A defendant may be held strictly liable for a defective product and have their damages reduced by the portion of the plaintiff’s negligence.
Ford Motor v. Matthews
Tractor Safety Mechanism
A manufacturer is not strictly liable if the plaintiff misused the product, but is liable if the plaintiff used the product for its proper purpose carelessly.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor
Collapsed Wheel from Defective Wood
If it is foreseeable that a product, if manufactured defectively, would cause injury, the manufacturer has a duty of care to all foreseeable users.
Negligence Risk-Utility Analysis
- Essentially negligence calculus, weighs up the risk associated with the product and its utility
- Design is defective if the risk of the product is greater than its utility
- Factors: usefulness to society, functional utility, style/marketability, number and severity of injuries, cost to reduce risk, consumer knowledge of danger, feasibility of loss spreading
Consumer Expectation Analysis
A design is defective if the product is more dangerous than could be anticipated by the ordinary consumer.
Reasonable Alternative Test
- A design is defective if foreseeable risks could be reduced by adopting an alternative design.
- A manufacturer is liable if they do not adopt designs where the safety advantages outweigh possible disadvantages (cost, attractiveness, etc.)
Warning Defect
A manufacturer is liable for injuries resulting from a failure to warn the user of a foreseeable risk or from a failure to warn the user of foreseeable misuses and the associated harms.
‘Good Warning’
- Adequately attracts the user’s attention
- Discloses the nature and extent of possible harm
- Instructs the user on how to avoid or mitigate the risk of harm
‘Good Warning’
- Adequately attracts the user’s attention
- Discloses the nature and extent of possible harm
- Instructs the user on how to avoid or mitigate the risk of harm
Anderson v. Owens
Asbestos Warning
- A manufacturer has no duty to warn of obvious risks or to warn of risks they could not and did not know.
- To be held strictly liable for failure to warn, the defendant must have had actual and constructive knowledge of the potential risk.
Express Preemption
- If Congress has the power to regulate products and manufacturers comply with these regulations, state courts cannot impose tort law on the manufacturers for design defects.
- If a product is pre-market approved by a federal agency the manufacturer is not liable for any injuries resulting from design defects.
Implied Preemption
Even if Congress did not expressly pass preemption laws and regulations, a manufacturer may not be held liable for design defects if doing so would frustrate the will of Congress.
Sellers
A seller is liable for any product they sell in an unreasonably dangerous condition if the seller sold the product and the product reaches the consumer in the same condition.
